Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Voting Machine Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would require background checks of private vendors who program and maintain voting machines; sponsor cites modest per-check cost
Summary
HB 574 would require background checks and monthly reporting for private companies and contractors who program or maintain the state's voting machines. Sponsor Representative Claudine Burnham told the committee the number of employees affected is smaller than the fiscal note assumes and estimated total costs far lower than the bill's fiscal note.
A bill before the House Election Law Committee would require background checks for employees of private companies and contractors who program or maintain New Hampshire voting machines and make limited personnel information publicly available.
Representative Claudine Burnham introduced HB 574 and said the bill is intended to improve voter confidence by ensuring individuals who program or maintain ballot-counting devices are vetted. "This is essential to our election integrity process," Burnham said, adding that most contractors already conduct background checks for sensitive roles.
Burnham told the committee she expected the number of relevant employees to be smaller than the fiscal note assumes and estimated an upper-bound cost using a $50 per background-check figure. "The most this would cost the state is about $4,050 not the $715,000 that is estimated in this bill," Burnham said, noting that many companies require background checks on hiring and the checks need not be annual in every case.
Committee members raised questions about what identifying numbers contractors would be required to provide, asking whether the bill would require Social Security numbers to be posted publicly or whether the bill intends an employee identification number. Burnham said she did not intend Social Security numbers to be published and believed an employer ID would be suitable.
Members also asked whether background checks alone would prevent code tampering or malware-like incidents. Burnham said background checks are one of several layers of security and could help reduce risk but are not a singular solution.
The chair read online testimony counts posted for HB 574 as 13 in support and 11 opposed. The committee closed the public hearing after questions and testimony.
Why it matters: Voting machine security is a high-salience topic for election administrators and the public. The bill would add a personnel-based security requirement for vendors and contractors and raise questions about privacy, public disclosure, and how background-check costs would be covered.
What’s next: Committee members may ask the sponsor or staff to clarify what identifier would be required, whether results are posted publicly and at what level of detail, and how frequently checks must be updated.
